Municipal Solid Waste Composition Determination Supporting the ...

37 downloads 0 Views 925KB Size Report
Mar 8, 2012 - legislation impacts. The aim of this paper is to determine the composition of. MSW in Gaza Strip. Two field studies were conducted on Gaza.
International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2012

Municipal Solid Waste Composition Determination Supporting the Integrated Solid Waste Management in Gaza Strip Ahmad AbdAlqader and Jehad Hamad generation, to facilitate design of processing equipment, to estimate physical, chemical, and thermal properties of the waste and to maintain compliance with national law and European directives. The composition of generated waste is extremely variable as a consequence of seasonal, lifestyle, demographic, geographic, and legislation impacts. This variability makes defining and measuring the composition of waste more difficult and at the same time more essential. The two most widely used methods for waste characterization are the materials flow method and site-specific sampling via sorting and weighing refuse by category. The materials flow method uses industry data on the production and import and export of goods to estimate waste generation. It is best applied at the national level. In addition, the materials flow approach cannot account for seasonal, geographic, and socioeconomic differences at regional or local levels. [3] A standard method for determining waste composition by sorting method has been published by ASTM D5231-92 (2003). The ASTM method notes that: 1) the number of samples should be defined based on statistical criteria; 2) load selection for sampling should be randomized and performed over a 5–7-days period and; 3) the initial sample should weigh approximately four times the subsample that will be sorted. The method also provides an abbreviated list of waste component categories and category definition. [2]-[3] This paper aims to determine the composition of municipal solid waste in Gaza Strip in attempt to support the integration of MSW management.

Abstract— Municipal solid waste (MSW) composition studies are essential to proper management of waste for a variety of reasons including a need to estimate potential materials recovery, to identify sources of component generation, to facilitate design of processing equipment, to estimate physical, chemical, and thermal properties of the wastes, and to maintain compliance with regulations. The composition of generated waste is extremely variable as a consequence of seasonal variation, lifestyle, demographic, geographic, and local legislation impacts. The aim of this paper is to determine the composition of MSW in Gaza Strip. Two field studies were conducted on Gaza Strip landfills during 2010 and 2011 to find out the average composition of the MSW. The methodology and procedures for this study were derived from the Standard Test Method for Determination of the Composition of Unprocessed MSW (ASTM D 5231-92). All samples were hand sorted into 7 waste categories (paper, plastic, food waste, other organics, metals, glass, and other waste). The composition of the entire waste stream was 52% Organics (most of them are food waste), 13% Plastics, 11% Papers, 3% Metals, 3% Glass and 18% Other Waste. Consequently, these results should be taken as a baseline for the entire area. Index Terms—Municipal solid waste; waste composition; landfills; gaza strip.

I. INTRODUCTION In many regions and countries, national and international targets have been set for MSW recycling, recovery and diversion from landfills. To develop and implement effective strategies to meet these targets requires reliable information on the composition of all parts of the MSW stream. [1] The cornerstone of successful planning for a waste management program is the availability of reliable information about the quantity and the type of material being generated and the understanding about how much of that material can expect to prevent or capture. Waste characterization studies are also used to assist in planning, policy development, and infrastructure sizing decisions for various facets of an integrated solid waste management program. [2]-[3] Gidarakos et al. (2005) argued that effective waste management through MSW composition studies is important for numerous reasons, including the need to estimate material recovery potential, to identify sources of component

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

Manuscript received February 3, 2012; revised March 8, 2012. Authors are with civil engineering department, Islamic university of Gaza, P.O.Box 108 Gaza, Palestine (e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]).

172

As shown in Map (1), Gaza Strip located along the coast of the eastern Mediterranean Sea stretches over a distance of approximately 45km from the city of Beit Hanoun in the north to Rafah city in the south. Its width varies between 6 and 12 km and the total area is about 365 km2. Administratively, Gaza Strip is divided into five governorates: North, Gaza, Middle, Khan Younis and Rafah governorate in the south bordering with Egypt. Each governorate consists of municipalities that varied in number depending on the number of towns or villages and the population of each. [4] Currently, there are three landfills in Gaza Strip; in southern part of Gaza strip, in middle area and in Gaza governorate. In Gaza Governorate, the disposal site, landfill No1. shown in Map (1), covers at least 14 hectare (1 hectare = 10000 m2) directly east of Gaza City and adjoining the Green Line with Israel. This site receives about 1000 tons per day of

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2012

A. Pre-Sort Site Assessment Prior to initiating the actual sorting events, it was critical to conduct site assessments at each of the solid waste facilities. The purpose of the site assessments was to promote staff support and cooperation for the sorting events and to initiate the gathering of data to develop the sampling and sorting plan for each facility.

wastes from both Gaza and Northern Governorates under joint agreement. [5]

B. Sampling and Sorting Events Sampling was carried out at those disposal sites (landfills) according to international standard ASTM D 5231-92(2003). The determination of the mean composition of MSW was based on the collection and manual sorting of a number of samples of waste over a selected time period covering one week for each site. Therefore, sampling was carried out for a period of three weeks. Vehicle loads of waste were designated for sampling, and a sorting sample was collected from the discharged vehicle load. The sample was sorted manually into waste components. The weight fraction of each component in the sorting sample was calculated by the weights of the components. The mean waste composition was calculated using the results of the composition of each of the sorting samples. Based on ASTM D5231-92, the number of sorting samples (that is, vehicle loads (n) required to achieve a desired level of measurement precision) is a function of the component(s) under consideration and the confidence level. The governing equation for n is as follows: [6] n = t ∗ s⁄ex

(1)

where t* is the student t statistic corresponding to the desired level of confidence, s the estimated standard deviation, e the desired level of precision, and x is the estimated mean. Vehicles for sampling were selected randomly during each day of the one-week sampling period at each site, as to be representative of the waste stream. According to ASTM D5231-92, for a weekly sampling period of k days, the number of vehicles sampled each day should be approximately n/k, where n is the total number of vehicle loads to be selected for the determination of waste composition. A weekly period is defined as 6 days. Each sorting sample weighed 91–136 kg and was prepared properly (mixed, coned and quartered) from each discharged MSW vehicle load using a front-end loader with at least a 1 m3 bucket. After sampling, hand sorting applied for the classification of MSW into seven categories. Each material category is then weighed and registered in the data sheet. The complete list of material categories and their definitions are included in the Table I.

Map 1: Gaza Strip Map with landfills Locations

In the Middle Governorate, the landfill No.2 shown in Map (1) is located east of Deir El Balah city and covers approximately 6 hectare and also adjacent to the Green Line with Israel. This landfill receives about 300 tons per day of wastes from both Middle Governorate and Khan Younis Governorate under Joint Service Council agreement. [5] In Rafah Governorate a waste disposal site, landfill No.3, of approximately 2.7 hectare is located near to Sofa crossing border as shown in Map (3). This site receives 130 tons per day of waste from different communities of Rafah Governorate including different municipalities. [5]

III. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two field work were conducted in three disposal facilities where approximately all solid waste in Gaza strip reach them as shown in Map (1). The first study was conducted during the period from the end of October 2010 to the mid of November 2010 while the second study was conducted in October 2011. For the unseen circumstance at landfill No. 3 during the sampling period, the study took place at Rafah transfer station located in the city of Rafah. The following procedures were implemented in each facility and in both studies to ensure the same conditions in each study for comparison and analysis.

C. Data Review and Entry Upon completing the sampling and sorting of the materials, the data sheets were reviewed to ensure the following: • Individual entries were legible; • Generator area was clearly identified; • Specific comments on unusual aspects of a sample were comprehensible; and • A minimum of 91 kg of materials were sampled and sorted for each sample. After that, the percentage of each category is computed by dividing the weight of it by the total weight in each sample. 173

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2012

An average then is calculated from all samples for each category.

Furthermore, it is found that most of samples were taken from Gaza governorate (about 85%) inasmuch as it has larger area and more population than north governorate and this is similar actually to the percentage of vehicles entering the landfill from this governorate. In spite of that the samples were covered all areas disposing in Gaza landfill.

TABLE I: DESCRIPTIONS OF WASTE COMPONENT CATEGORIES Category

Description

Paper

Office paper, computer paper, magazines, glossy paper, waxed paper, newsprint and corrugated.

C. Results of Landfill No.2 (Middle area landfill) This landfill receives wastes from both Middle Food waste All food waste except bones Governorate and Khan Younis Governorate under Joint Yard waste (Branches, twigs, leaves, grass, and other Service Council (JSC) agreement. In addition it is recorded plant material), wood, textiles, rubber, leather, and Other organics other primarily burnable materials not included in the that about 350 tons reached the landfill every day [9] and the above component categories population in both governorates are 530,000 [8] which means Ferrous (Iron, steel, tin cans, and bi-metal cans), that the per capita production is 0.66 kg/capita/day, this value Metals aluminum, and non-ferrous non-aluminum metals may return in one hand to the wrong practice of some (copper, brass, etc.) municipalities which prefer to use illegal dumpsite than send Glass All glass the waste to the landfill, thus they don’t pay fees for using the Other waste Rock, sand, dirt, ceramics, plaster, and bones landfill. On the other hand many of the areas using the landfill are rural which known of low waste production especially in the east of Khan Yuonis governorate. IV. RESULTS Forty samples were collected and analyzed at this site during six days from vehicles coming from various locations A. Number of Samples Determination The number of samples in each site was calculated covering all areas disposing in this landfill. All of samples according to ASTM standards taking into consideration a 95% were sorted in the same site on daily basis. The waste composition for the waste stream entering this confidence level and assuming food waste as a govern landfill is shown in Table III. The percentage composition of component which mean that standard deviation (s) equals to waste combined from all locations was 54% organic, 12% 0.03 and estimated mean x equals to 0.1, in addition a 10% plastic, 11% paper (most of them are corrugated), 3% metals, of precision (e) is desired. Therefore 38 samples were needed 3% glass and 18% other waste (most of them are sand and to be sorted in each site so that it was taken 40 samples for debris). Indeed, organics were the largest composition and classification, thus 6-7 samples were sorted each day in each glass was the smallest composition for all locations. site. Plastics

All plastics.

TABLE III: COMPOSITION OF MSW IN MIDDLE LANDFILL (WEIGHT BASIS)

B. Results of Landfill No. 1(Gaza landfill) This landfill receives daily waste of about 900-1000 ton wastes from both Gaza Governorate and Northern Governorate. [7] Since there are about 852,000 inhabitants in the both governorates [8], the per capita production of waste almost equal to 1.2 kg/capita/day. In the both field studies, forty samples were collected and analyzed in this site during six days from vehicles coming from various locations covering all areas disposing in this landfill. All of samples were sorted in the same site day by day. The waste composition for the waste stream entering this landfill is shown in Table II. The percentage composition of waste combined from all locations was 47% organic, 15% plastic, 11% paper (most of them are corrugated), 4% metal, 3% glass and 19% other waste (most of them are sand and debris). Indeed, organics were the largest composition and glass was the smallest composition for all locations.

Weight % (2010)

Weight % (2011)

Average %

Organics Plastic

44.9

50

47

12.2

18.3

15

Paper

14.8

7.7

11

Metals

5.1

2.5

4

Glass

4.6

1.9

3

Other Wastes

18.4

19.6

19

Total

100

100

100

Weight % (2010)

Weight % (2011)

Average %

Organics

50.4

57.7

54

Plastic

11.1

13

12

Paper

13.1

8

11

Metals

3.2

2.2

3

Glass

3.1

2

3

Other Wastes

19.1

17.1

18

Total

100

100

100

D. Results of Landfill No.3 (Rafah landfill) Rafah waste disposal site is located near to Sofa crossing border, where the security situation is very dangerous. Therefore the survey was conducted in Rafah transfer station located within the city area in the west of Rafah which received solid waste from Rafah municipality only and other municipalities use the landfill directly. Actually, to get over this problem some vehicles from municipalities using the landfill were requested to the transfer station and they were unloaded in it so that some samples were taken from them. Based on Rafah municipality records about 120 ton of solid waste are produced daily in Rafah governorate [10] which has 193,000 inhabitants live in it [8]. In other words the residents in Rafah governorate produce 0.62 kg/capita/day of solid waste. Fundamentally this low value may resulted from the wrong practice of some municipalities which prefer to use illegal dumpsite than sending the waste to the landfill, thus they don’t pay fees for using landfill. Also

TABLE II: COMPOSITION OF MSW IN LANDFILL NO.1 (WEIGHT BASIS) Component

Component

174

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2012

Deir El-Balah landfill and Rafah transfer station from the other side. This percentage in Gaza landfill be justified by the ample existence of Plastics importers and Plastics factories in Gaza governorate.

TABLE IV: COMPOSITION OF MSW IN RAFAH TRANSFER STATION (WEIGHT BASIS)

Fig. 1. Aggregate composition by major material category in each facility

Component

Weight % (2010)

Weight % (2011)

Average %

Organics

49.2

62

56

Plastic

12.3

10.5

11

Paper

14.7

6.3

11

Metals

3

2.5

3

Glass

2.5

1.9

2

Other Wastes

18.3

16.8

18

Total

100

100

100

Mean by weight %

some areas using this landfill are rural which known of low waste production especially in the east of Rafah governorate; in addition some recyclable materials are extracted and converted to small scale recycling facilities. Forty samples were collected and sorted during six working days from vehicles coming from various locations covering all areas disposing in Rafah landfill. The waste composition for the waste stream entering Rafah landfill is shown in Table IV. The percentage composition of waste combined from all locations within Rafah governorate was 56% organics, 11% papers (most of them are corrugated), 11% plastics, 3% metal, 2% glass and 18% other waste (most of them are sand and debris). Indeed, organics were the largest composition and glass was the smallest composition for all locations.

Gaza

Weight % (2010)

Weight % (2011)

Average %

47.4

56.6

52

Plastic

12.1

14

13

Paper

14.5

7.3

11

Metals

3.8

2.4

3

Glass

4.6

2

3

Other Wastes

17.6

17.7

18

Total

100

100

100

Rafah

Organics 52%

Other Waste 18%

Plastic 13% Papers Glass 11% 3% Metals 3%

Organics

Plastic

Papers

Metals

Glass

Other Waste

Fig. 2. MSW Composition in Gaza Strip

This is followed by plastics which generally comprise nearly 13% of waste composition which most of it is cardboard. The category “plastic” included all grades of plastic bags, bottles, packaging, all-weather sheeting, and all grades of hard and soft plastics from toys, appliances, and many other sources. Papers, being the third in components order, make up 11% of the waste stream which most of it is cardboard. Paper and Plastic have a significant percentages and this is somewhat surprising. Subsequent to plastic, metals and glass represent about 6% (3% metals and 3% glass) of waste stream. And finally, the other waste materials comprise 18% of waste composition which most of them are sand and fine materials.

TABLE V: COMPOSITION OF MSW IN GAZA STRIP (WEIGHT BASIS) Organics

Deir Balah

In Gaza strip as shown in Fig. 2, Organic wastes constitute the largest component in the waste stream by weight. These organic wastes comprise nearly half of the weight of waste which half of them are food waste and the rest are other organics.

E. Overall Solid Waste Compositions in Gaza Strip A year later (2011) the study has been repeated. Three-weeks of field sorting events were conducted at three participating facilities. A total of 240 samples were collected and sorted in this analysis. Knowing that the average weight of each sample was more than 100 kg then the total weight of samples was about 24,000 Kg. Statistically, the results can be considered representative because the participating facilities manage approximately 100% of the Gaza strip waste. In addition, the samples were well distributed between the residential areas. Depicted in Table V and Fig.1 are the results by each facility and weighted average of MSW composition in Gaza Strip. It can be inferred also that Rafah governorate as well as Gaza and northen governorates have the same paper and plastic percentages. Additionally, there is a similar food waste percentage in Gaza, Deir El-Balah, and Khan Younis governorates.

Component

60 40 20 0

F. Comparison with Other Regional Studies In developing countries the organic fraction is high and may reach up to 60%. Solid waste characterization and quantification is very helpful and economically feasible, since the method of handling, storage and processing of solid wastes at the source plays an important role in public health,

Obviously, there is a significance difference in Plastics percentages between Gaza landfill from one side and both of 175

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2012 [3]

aeesthetics and the efficiencyy of the munnicipal solid waste w syystem. [11] Table VI shows s the reesults of composition sttudies coonducted in vaarious districtss within the West W Bank/Paleestine ass well as the most m recent puublished study in Israel.

[4] [5]

T TABLE VI: COM W IN GAZA STRIPP (WEIGHT BASIS) [12] MPOSITION OF MSW – –[15] Study Reeference Ouur Study (20010-201 1)

Studdy Regioon Gaza Stripp

Componennts %

[6]

Organi cs

Plasti cs

Pape rs

Meta ls

Glas s

Othe rs

53

13

11

3

3

18

[7] [8] [9]

Allkhatee, 2009

Ramaall ah annd Jerichho

41

AbbuZahr, 2006

Nabllus

63

8

10

3

3

13

All Khatib et al, 2010

Nabluus

65

8

9

3

3

12

IIsraeli MoE, 2007

Israeel

40

13

25

3

3

16

25

16

3

3

12 [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]

V. CONCLUSION O The two yearrs of field sam mpling and anaalysis of muniicipal soolid waste in Gaza strip reveal r the com mposition of solid w waste in this part of the world. The resullts show that there haave been a significant perccentage of reccyclable mateerials. Thhe study reveaals some differrences with otther studies in West Bank and Israel. Overall the study indicateed that the average coomposition off municipal sollid waste in weest bank, Israeel and G Gaza Strip rannging betweenn 42 to 60 % organics, plaastics beetween 13 to 25 2 % and papper is about 111 to 25%. It iss also cllear that abouut 12 to 18% % of waste cllassified as others o m mainly sand. As there are no previous studies in thee last decade about a m municipal solidd waste compposition in thee Gaza Strip, these reesults should be b taken as a baseline b for thhe entire area.

[15]

Jehad T. Haamad has a Ph h.D. in the field of Geotechnical//Geoenvironmenttal Engineering Louisiana Staate University - December D 1990. He worked at Souuthern Illinois Un niversity and Bir-zziet University. Cuurrently, He is a member m of the Civil Engineering department mic at the Islam University-Faaculty of Engineerring. He worked as a consultant engineer e in a num mber ng firms in USA and a of private and public engineerin Gaza Strip in the field of Geotechniical /Geoeenvironment Engiineering. Dr Hamad has publlished many papeers in field of anaalysis and designn of landfiills, improvementt of soils and the impact on enviro onment. bdalqader has MSc. M in the fieldd of Ahmed F. Ab Civil Engineeering/Infrastructu ure – June 201. He worked as a teaching assisstant in the Civil Engineering ddepartment at Isllamic Universityy of Gaza. Currently, hhe works as a heead of infrastructture department in the Ministry of Planning P since 20008. Mr. Abdalqadder is one of the Engineers E associattion members.

REFEERENCES [1]

[2]

B. F. Staley and M.A. M Barlaz, “Coomposition of Mu unicipal Solid Waaste in the United Sttates and Implicaations for Carbon n Sequestration and a Methane Yield,” Journal of Envirronmental Engineeering, vol. 135, no. 10, pp. 901-909, 2009. water Losses due to Urban Expanssion A. Khalaf, “Asseessment of Rainw of Gaza Strip,” MSc M thesis in Waater Resources Management, M Islam mic University of Gaaza, Palestine, 20005. A. Nassar and A. A Jaber, “Assesssment of Solid Waste W Dumpsitess in Gaza Strip,” A report r published bby Environmentaal Quality Authorrity (EQA), 76 p, 20007. ASTM D 5231 – 92 (Reapproveed 2003), Standaard Test Method for Determination of the Compositioon of Unprocesssed Municipal Soolid Waste. ASTM Innternational, 6 p, 2003. Gaza Municipallity GM, unpub ublished report about solid waaste management. Pallestine, 2010. Ministry of Plannning MoP, Sectorral Planning in Gaaza Strip. Ministryy of Planning, 100 p, 2010. S unpublishhed Solid Waste Mannagement Councill – Middle Area SWMC, report about the yearly y status of soolid waste manageement in Middle and a Khanyounis goveernorates, Palestine, 2010. R. Municipality, unpublished repoort about solid waste w managemennt in Rafah, Palestine,, 2010. M. R. A. Moghaddam, N. Mokhtaraani, B. Mokhtaran ni, “Municipal Soolid Waste Managem ment in Rasht Cityy, Iran,” Waste Management M vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 485-4889, 2009. A. Al-Khateeb, “Municipal “ Solidd Waste Managem ment in Jericho and a Ramallah Cities in the West Bannk, Palestine,” M.Sc M Thesis. Birzzeit University, Palesstine. 2009. A. F. Abu Zahra,, “Evaluation of S Solid Waste Manaagement Practices in Nablus District,””. M.Sc Thesis. A An-Najah University, Palestine. 20006. I. A. Al-Khatib,, M. Monou, A. F. Abu Zahra, H. Q. Shaheen, D. Kassinos, “Solid Waste Chaaracterization, Quantification Q a and Management Praactices in Developping Countries. A Case Study: Nabblus District–Palestinne,” Journal of E Environmental Management M vol. 91, pp. 1131-1138, 2010. 2 Ministry of Enviironmental Proteection, Planning For F Integrated Soolid Waste Managem ment in Israel, Isrrael Environment Bulletin 32, 14--19, 2007.

S. J. Burnleyya, J. C. Ellis, R. Flowerdew, A. J. J Poll, and H. Prosser, P “Assessing thhe Composition of Municipal Solid Waste in Wales,” W Resources, Conservation C and Recycling vol. 49, 4 no. 3, pp. 2664-283, 2007. E. Gidarakoss, G. Havas, and P. Ntzamilis, “M Municipal Solid Waste Composition Determination Supporting S The Integrated I Solid Waste Management System in The Issland of Crete,” Waste W Managemennt vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1-12, 2005.

176